Armageddon in The Middle East - Part 4 - The Nuclear Option

Wherein we speculate on how we end up with World War III...

Warning - This is going to be a long post. Each part is likely to be cut off by your email service. Remember that there are links to the full article at the top of the email, and that your email service usually provides another means at the bottom of the email to view the full email in a new tab.

At the end of part 3, I laid the groundwork for considering how far the Middle East conflict could escalate, as follows:

So now the war has hypothetically escalated from Lebanon to Syria and Iraq and then to Iran. How much further could it escalate?

There are two likely scenarios:

1. Israel and/or the US seriously attacks Syria.

2. Israel and/or the US seriously attacks Iran.

What do I mean by "seriously"? I mean "existentially", i.e., where either Syria or Iran is in danger of either having their governments destroyed, or having a significant amount of their economic and civilian infrastructure and military capability destroyed, such that the country is effectively unable to function as a country and is forced to sue for surrender. In effect, become as Ukraine is being reduced by Russia.

The only way either of these countries can be reduced to that degree is with an overwhelming military attack by the US (in the case of both countries) or an overwhelming attack by Israel (in the case of Syria) - or by the use of nuclear weapons by either Israel or the US.

In either case, I fully expect Russia and/or China to intervene in some manner to prevent those outcomes.

This is the subject of Part 4.

Scenario 4

Specifically, let us consider Scenario 4 of the ChatGPT AI suggested scenarios mentioned in Part 3:

Scenario 4: Israeli Use of Tactical Nuclear Weapons
Israel, facing significant casualties and military setbacks, considers using tactical nuclear weapons to destroy Hezbollah's military infrastructure and command centers.

The US, aware of Israel's intentions, intervenes diplomatically to prevent a nuclear escalation, but Israel decides to use tactical nuclear weapons in a limited capacity.

The use of tactical nuclear weapons has a devastating impact on Hezbollah's military capabilities, but also causes significant environmental and humanitarian damage.

The international community, including the US, condemns Israel's use of nuclear weapons, and imposes severe diplomatic and economic sanctions on Israel.

The conflict ends with a ceasefire, but the region is left to deal with the long-term consequences of nuclear war.

And let's also consider the impact if Israel were to attempt to launch nuclear weapons at Iran, either at Iran's nuclear facilities (which are buried deep underground and are only susceptible to nuclear strikes, other than strikes at the relevant electricity facilities) or at Iran's government and military structures.

Will Israel use tactical nukes on Lebanon? Where? Do they know where Hezbollah is located in those freeway-sized tunnels that cover miles of Lebanese terrain? What is the blast range of a tactical nuke? How many can they drop to actually seriously affect Hezbollah operations? Do they want radioactive fallout landing in Israel? Doubtful answers to those questions...

It's not the same as dropping a nuke on Beirut or Tehran or Damascus - which is exactly why Hezbollah is essentially invulnerable unless the Israelis want to actually go into Lebanon and go into those tunnel. Since the Israeli military is mostly refusing to go into Hamas tunnels, I submit they won't be capable of doing it in Lebanon. So Hezbollah remains invulnerable.

I also note Pepe Escobar's article "The Palestinian Tragedy: Cui bono?" from last October, 2023, in which comments from a Russian general on Israel's options is relevant.

It’s always instructive to compare the Israeli dream of a Final Solution with facts on the ground. So let’s call Lt Gen Andrey Gurulev, a member of the State Duma Commission for reviewing federal budget expenditures on national defense, national security and law enforcement, and a member of the Duma Committee on Defense.

Here are Gurulev’s key points:

“Israeli bombings have no effect militarily.”

“Armed people in Palestine are in shelters, civilians are dying in residential buildings. We went through this in Syria, when in Damascus, for example, they sit in underground tunnels and come out only when necessary. Hamas prepared 100%, it was not without reason that they did this, they have reserves of weapons and food. (…) The Israelis are shown in columns on tanks, on infantry fighting vehicles, what are they waiting for? Waiting for drones to fly over them? We went through this during the special military operation. Tanks in urban areas are practically ineffective.”

“On the two aircraft carrier groups in the Mediterranean. On board these ships, according to my calculations, there are approximately 750-800 Tomahawk missiles, which cover a decent amount of the territory of the Russian Federation (…) Our President immediately decided to put Mig-31s with Kinzhal missiles on combat duty.

For some reason, everyone imagines that one plane with one Kinzhal will fly somewhere, will fly along the Black Sea, but everything is much more global. Firstly, this is the use of all reconnaissance systems linked into a single information system with the issuance of specific target instructions to control points. If an aircraft enters the airspace of the Black Sea, then it must have a support echelon protecting it from enemy air attacks, air defense systems, and everything else. This is a global set of measures to deter the American aggressor from thinking of attacking the territory of the Russian Federation. In front of us are two aircraft carrier groups, equipped to the teeth, capable of hitting targets on the territory of our country, should we just stand there and pick our noses? We must react normally.”

“If the entire Middle East is drawn into the war, aircraft carrier groups try to strike the territory of Iran, then Iran will not remain silent, they have targets ready, all critical objects, they will attack them in different ways, despite the Iron Dome and everything else.”

Pentagon analysts will certainly understand what Gurulev is saying. Not Straussian neocon psychos though.

There are two points of interest there. One is the fact that aerial bombardment with conventional warheads is ineffective against buried opponents - a fact the Vietnamese demonstrated to the United States despite B-52 carpet bombing, however impressive it appeared above ground, and was re-emphasized in the roughly 3-month NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999. This suggests that Israel's promises of "destroying Lebanon" - in the sense of destroying Lebanese infrastructure - and civilians - as means of pressuring Hezbollah to curtail its operations will not in any way compromise Hezbollah's ability to function militarily. It also suggests that once this becomes apparent to the Israeli command structure that an urge to use tactical nuclear weapons will be seen as the only viable alternative to deal with the deeply underground "missile cities" that both Hezbollah and Iran enjoy, as discussed in the earlier portions of this series.

The second point is the Russian response to the situation: put MiG-31Ks with hypersonic Kinzhal missiles on patrol over the Black Sea with the capability to hit NATO warships in the Mediterranean. This in addition to the Russians and Syrian announcing joint patrols of the Syrian border:

The first joint air patrol mission of this kind to have been announced by the Russian Ministry of Defense involved Syrian Air Force MiG-23 Flogger and MiG-29 Fulcrum fighter jets, together with Russian Aerospace Forces Su-34 Fullback strike aircraft and Su-35 Flanker multirole fighters and A-50 Mainstay airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft.

I've also pointed out in other venues that Russia undoubtedly knows exactly where Israel's nuclear weapons are stored. They wouldn't have entered the Syrian conflict back in 2015 without that background knowledge.

Hezbollah also knows where Israel's nuclear weapons are stored or would be deployed from. In 2018, they published a video showing photos and coordinates of the following Israeli critical military infrastructure:

1. Palmahim Air Force Base, home to helicopter and UAV squadrons, as well as long range Jericho missiles and Israel’s space satellite launch pad.

2. Tel Nof Air Force Base.

3. Nevatim Air Force Base, home to five squadrons including Israel’s new F35’s.

4. Hatzor Air Force Base.

5. The nuclear reactor close to Dimona.

6. The Haifa Oil Refinery.

7. The ‘Kirya’ Ministry of Defence and IDF Headquarters in central Tel Aviv.

The two air bases highlighted are reportedly home to some of Israel's nuclear delivery air assets and the third reportedly has some of Israel's Jericho missiles. And of course the Dimona reactor - The Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center - is the center of Israel's nuclear weapons capability.

Even Hamas may know where Israeli keeps its nuclear weapons, according to this article from December, 2023:
Report: Hamas rocket hit IDF base thought to house nuclear-capable missiles on Oct 7

Also from that article:

The reported attack on the Sdot Micha base is not the frst time that Israeli Air Force bases have been the target of Hamas missiles. During the May 2021 Operation Guardian of the Walls, Hamas claimed that it had intentionally targeted Air Force bases at Hatzor, Hatzerim, Nevatim, Tel Nof, Palmachim, and Ramon.

Israel’s Nuclear Capabilities

Information about Israel's nuclear weapons capability is limited, both due to its naturally classified state and also to Israel's policy of "nuclear ambiguity", i.e., never discussing what it does or does not have in terms of its nuclear weapons. So most of the available information is based on intelligence estimates from official and non-official sources and leaks over the years from people like Mordechai Vanunu, the Israeli nuclear engineer and peace activist who revealed details of the program in 1986 (an act which got him abducted by the Israelis and sentenced to 18 years in prison.)

The articles I relied on for this section are as follows:

The Federation of American Scientists Nuclear Information Project Nuclear Forces Guide - specifically "Israel"

The Center For Arms Control and Non-Proliferation Israel’s Nuclear Inventory Fact Sheet

Wikipedia's entry for Israel and weapons of mass destruction

The Campaign For Nuclear Disarmament - Israel's Nuclear Arsenal: What We Know

The Atomic Archive - Israel's Nuclear Facilities

Israeli nuclear weapons, 2021 by Hans M. Kristensen & Matt Korda
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 78:1, 38-50, DOI: 10.1080/00963402.2021.2014239

EU Non-Proliferation Consortium - Nuclear capabilities in the Middle East (PDF Download)

Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control - Israel's Nuclear Weapon Capability: An Overview (archived)

Seymour Hersh, The Samson Option: Israel's Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy (1991), Random House, 1st, 1991 - available for free from Anna's Archive.

Center For Strategic and International Studies Study on a Possible Israeli Strike on Iran's Nuclear Development Facilities

I recommend readers view the above articles for a more detailed description of Israel's nuclear arsenal than I will attempt here. However, I will provide an overview drawn from the above sources.

Israel has four main nuclear weapons delivery systems:

1. Land-based missiles from launch silos (Jericho II and III).

2. Road-Mobile missiles (Jericho II and III).

3. Air-delivery by aircraft as gravity bombs (no indication of missile launch capability).

4. Submarine launched cruise missiles.

The total number of nuclear explosive devices of any kind which Israel can produce is limited by the plutonium production capacity of the Dimona reactor. This is a matter of some speculation among experts. The Federation of American Scientists article referenced above came to this conclusion:

This would suggest an annual production rate of plutonium of about 20 kilograms.

Based on plausible upper and lower bounds of the operating practices at the reactor, Israel could have thus produced enough plutonium for at least 100 nuclear weapons, but probably not significantly more than 200 weapons.

Also note that, as usual, the issue is not so much the number of warheads but the number of delivery vehicles, either by air, land or sea, gravity bomb or missile. Estimates of delivery vehicles are also speculative, with most analysts settling on perhaps 50-90 missile launchers, an unknown number of air-delivered gravity bombs, and an unknown number of submarine-launched cruise missiles (if such actually exist, which has never been confirmed.)

The Center For Arms Control and Non-Proliferation Israel’s Nuclear Inventory states the following about Israel aircraft delivery:

Israel maintains the U.S.-produced F-15, F-16 and F-35 aircraft, which are all capable of carrying nuclear gravity bombs with modification. The F-15 has a range of 3,500 kilometers, but it is unknown if it has been modified to serve a nuclear role. The F-16 has a shorter-range of 1,600 kilometers and is the most likely aircraft to serve a nuclear role since it does so for the U.S. nuclear force and some other NATO members. However, Israel is in the process of replacing the F-16 with the F-35, which the United States has also given a nuclear mission. Israel is scheduled to receive the rest of the 50 stealth aircraft under order by 2024 and is considering purchasing 25 more F-35s from the United States.

According to more current sources, Israel currently has 39 F-35s out of the original order and has ordered another 25 for future delivery.

Israel has a huge number of F-16s, over 300, including variants specially made for the Israeli Air Force with extended range fuel tanks specifically to improve its ability for long-range attacks - presumably against Iran, although the planes would still require in-air refueling or intermediate landings for refueling. The US has conveniently supplied them with advanced in-air refueling aircraft, as mentioned just today as I type this:

According to newly released public contracting documents obtained by The Intercept, the Pentagon will be constructing and upgrading facilities at an Israeli military base in the southern region of occupied Palestine.

The project, outlined by the Army Corps of Engineers, involves the construction of new hangars, warehouses, and storage buildings. The expansion is part of a nearly $1 billion contract awarded to Boeing in 2022, which includes the delivery of four KC-46A Pegasus refueling tankers by 2026.

These aircraft will bolster the Israeli occupation's midair refueling capabilities, allowing for extended operations by its fighter jets, which could play a critical role in potential strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in the case of further regional instability.

More evidence that the US is explicitly planning for a US/Israel-Iran war...

The following table from The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Israeli nuclear weapons, from back in 2021, lists the available nuclear arsenal:

.The article also notes the following:

The International Panel on Fissile Materials estimates that as of the beginning of 2020, Israel may have a stockpile of about 980 ± 130 kilograms of plutonium (International Panel on Fissile Materials 2021). That amount could potent­ially be used to build anywhere between 170 and 278 nuclear weapons, assuming a second-generation, single- stage, fission-implosion warhead design with a boosted pit containing 4 to 5 kilograms of plutonium. Total plutonium production is a misleading indicator of the actual size of the Israeli nuclear arsenal, however, because Israel – like other nuclear-armed states – most likely would not have converted all of its plutonium into warheads; a portion is likely stored as a strategic reserve.

They also note with regard to nuclear-capable aircraft:

In the US Air Force, the F-15E Strike Eagle has been given a nuclear role. It is not known if the Israeli Air Force has added nuclear capability to this highly versatile plane, but when Israel sent half a dozen F-15Is from Tel Nof air base to the United Kingdom for an exercise in September 2019, a US official privately commented that Israel had sent its nuclear squadron (Kristensen 2019).

Further as to the locations of these aircraft - which agree with my previous references - they say:

The nuclear warheads themselves may be stored in underground facilities near one or two bases. Israeli F-16 squadrons are based at Ramat David Air Base in northern Israel; Tel Nof and Hatzor air bases in central Israel; and Hatzerim, Ramon, and Ovda air bases in southern Israel. Of the many F-16 squadrons, only a small fraction – perhaps one or two – would probably be nuclear-tasked (much less certified) with specially trained crews, unique procedures, and modified aircraft. The F-15s are based at Tel Nof Air Base in central Israel, and Hatzerim Air Base in the Negev desert. We cautiously suggest that Tel Nof Air Base in central Israel and Hatzerim Air Base in the Negev desert might have nuclear missions.

With regard to the Jericho missile capability, the article goes into some detail:

Most sources assert that Jericho was a mobile missile, transported and fired from a transportable erector launcher (CIA 1974). But there have occasionally been references to possible silos for the weapon. A US State Department study produced in support of National Security Study Memorandum 40 in May 1969 concluded that Israel believed it needed a nearly invulner­able nuclear force to deter a nuclear first strike from its enemies, “i.e. having a second-strike capability.” The study stated: “Israel is now building such a force – the hardened silos of the Jericho missiles” (US State Department 1969c, 7; emphasis added). It is not clear that the claim of “hardened silos” constituted the assessment of the US intelligence community or whether it referred to early construction of what is now thought to be mobile launcher bunkers at Sdot Micha, and only a few subsequent sources – all non-governmental – have mentioned Israeli missile silos. We have not found any public evidence of Jericho silos.

Given that approximately half of Iran (including Tehran) is beyond the range of Jericho II medium range ballistic missile, Israel is currently upgrading its arsenal with the newer and more capable three-stage Jericho III intermediate-range ballistic missile. The Jericho III reportedly has a range exceeding 4,000 kilometers, which would be able to target all of Iran, Pakistan, and all of Russia west of the Urals – including, for the first time, Moscow...It is unclear whether Israel is replacing its Jericho II missiles with Jericho IIIs on a one-for-one basis, or if they are being deployed concurrently, although the former is more likely. Upgrades of suspected launcher bunkers at Sdot Micha began in 2014.

How many Jericho missiles Israel has is another uncertainty. Unofficial estimates vary from 25 to 100. Most sources estimate that Israel has 50 of these missiles and place them at the Sdot Micha facility near the town of Zakharia in the Judean Hills, approximately 27 kilo­ meters east of Jerusalem. (There are many alternative spellings and names for the base, including Zekharyeh, Zekharaia, Sdot Micha, and Sdot HaElla.) Commercial satellite images show what appear to be two clusters of what might be caves or bunkers for mobile Jericho launchers at Sdot Micha. The northern cluster includes 14 caves and the southern cluster has nine caves, for a total of 23 caves.

Newly available high- resolution imagery from Maxar indicates that each cave appears to have two entrances, which suggests that each cave can hold up to two launchers. The satellite images show that cave refurbishment began in 2014 and appears to have been complete in 2020. The upgrade also included upgrades to several tunnels to underground facilities. If all 23 caves are full, this would amount to 46 launchers. Each cluster also has what appears to be a covered high-bay drive-through facility, potentially for missile handling or warhead loading. A nearby complex with its own internal perimeter has four tunnels to underground facilities that could potentially be for warhead storage (Figure 3). For the Jericho missiles to have military value, they would need to be able to disperse from their caves. The Sdot Micha base is relatively small at 16 square kilometers, and the suspected launcher caves are located along two roads, each of which is only about one kilometer long. This layout would provide protection against limited conventional attacks, but it would be vulnerable to a nuclear surprise attack. In a hypothetical crisis where the Israeli leadership decided to activate Israel’s nuclear capability, the launchers presumably would leave Sdot Mischa and take up positions in remote launch areas. A US State Department background paper from 1969 stated that there was “evidence strongly indicating that several sites providing operational launch capabilities are virtually complete” (US State Department 1969b, 4).

One can immediately see a problem here. If the approximate locations of the mobile road launchers origins are known, then under conditions of conflict an Israeli enemy - one which has satellite capability with adequate resolution - could conceivably locate and track the dispersal of the mobile launchers and target them independently. This would be a different situation than one in which mobile launchers are constantly moving about and evading satellite detection.

It is also a less useful solution than an underground launch facility with multiple concealed launch openings which appears to be the method Iran and Hezbollah have chosen. In Hezbollah's version of Iran's "missile cities", missiles are transported on truck launchers around the tunnels in the base to a given launch port. There may be multiple launch ports which makes targeting the one which is preparing to launch problematic. The various missile bases are also independent of each other in terms of command and control, so that even if the central command is eliminated, the individual bases can continue to execute their function.

Another point which should be mentioned - the range of Israel's nuclear missiles. While Iran has been accused of building "intercontinental ballistic missiles" capable of targeting Europe, it is Israel which has built missiles with the range to actually threaten not only Europe, but North America. As the article notes:

The Jericho III reportedly has a range exceeding 4,000 kilometers, which would be able to target all of Iran, Pakistan, and all of Russia west of the Urals – including, for the first time, Moscow...

The Wikipedia article on the Jericho missile system includes the following:

It is believed that the Jericho III (YA-4) is a nuclear-armed ICBM that entered service in 2011. The Jericho III is believed to have two or three-stages, using solid propellant and having a payload of 1,000 to 1,300 kg. The payload could be a single 750 kg (150–400 kiloton nuclear warhead or two or three low-yield MIRV (Multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle) warheads. It has an estimated launch weight of 30,000 kg and a length of 15.5 m with a width of 1.56 m. It may be similar to an upgraded and re-designed Shavit space launch vehicle, produced by Israel Aerospace Industries. It probably has longer first and second-stage motors. It is estimated by missilethreat.com that it has a range of 4,800 to 6,500 km (2,982 to 4,038 miles), though a 2004 missile proliferation survey by the Congressional Research Service put its possible maximum range at 11,500 km (missile range is inversely proportional to payload mass).

According to an official report that was submitted to the U.S. Congress in 2004, it may be that with a payload of 1,000 kg the Jericho III gives Israel nuclear strike capabilities within the entire Middle East, Africa, Europe, Asia and almost all parts of North America, as well as large parts of South America and North Oceania. Missile Threat reports: "The range of the Jericho 3 also provides an extremely high impact speed for nearby targets, enabling it to avoid any Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) defenses that may develop in the immediate region."

This is a weapon with which Israel can threaten Turkey, Europe and the US, not merely Iran. It's speed makes it a weapon which no one except possibly the Russian S-400 and S-500 air defense systems can defeat. And most importantly, this weapon can threaten Russia - and you can be absolutely sure that Russia is well aware of that - giving additional meaning to those Mig-31Ks with Kinzhal hypersonic weapons patrolling the Black Sea.

As I said before, Russia undoubtedly knows exactly where Israel's nuclear weapons are stored and deployed. Only Russia (and China and the US) has the capability to deal with Israel's land-based nuclear missile arsenal. I have suggested before elsewhere that if Israel threatened to use nukes against the region that Russia would react. Russia could take out Israel's land-based nukes with hypersonic missiles - with conventional warheads, not nukes - from the Black Sea or the Russian fleet in the Med. Russia could task its satellites to conduct surveillance of the Israeli mobile launcher bases and track and interdict that dispersal or preempt that dispersal by hitting the bases themselves. Despite being underground, if the cave is hit with a hypersonic missile with extreme bunker penetration capability, that could collapse the cave or the tunnels to the surface, rendering the mobile launchers moot, even with a conventional warhead. With a nuclear warhead, as noted in the article above, the cave complex could be destroyed depending on its depth. The Russian Kinzhal strike on a Ukrainian NATO training base early in the Russian-Ukraine war allegedly penetrated at least 70 meters through hard rock.

Israel’s Submarine Strike Capability

The real problem then becomes Israel's submarines.

As The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists article notes, Israel has five submarines: three Dolphin-class and two Dolphin 2 class with a sixth - another Dolphin 2 - undergoing sea trials. The latest sub, according to this article, is rumored to have a large conning tower which may signal that it can house ballistic missiles as well as cruise missiles. All these subs have advance stealth capabilities with a low acoustic signature.

Israel is also scheduled to receive three new Dakar-class submarines in the 2030s to replace the original 3 Dolphin-class subs.

These subs are allegedly capable of firing the Israeli "Popeye" air-to-surface missile. Wikipedia states the following:

The Popeye Turbo SLCM is a reportedly stretched version of the Popeye Turbo developed for use as a submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM), which was widely reported – in a US Navy-observed 2002 test in the Indian Ocean – to have hit a target 1,500 km (930 mi) away. It is reasonable to assume that the weapon's range has been extended to the point where it can launch against Tehran and even more Iranian cities from a relatively safe location. It can allegedly carry a 200 kiloton nuclear warhead. It is believed that the stretched Popeye Turbo is the primary strategic second strike nuclear deterrent weapon that can be fired from the 650 mm (26 in) secondary torpedo tubes of the Israeli Dolphin-class submarines. It is believed that the SLCM version of the Popeye was developed by Israel after the US Clinton administration refused an Israeli request in 2000 to purchase Tomahawk long range SLCM because of international MTCR ("Missile Technology Control Regime") proliferation rules. While the standard Popeye is 533 mm (21.0 in) the Dolphin class submarines have four 650 mm (26 in) torpedo tubes in addition to the six standard 533 mm (21.0 in) tubes allowing for the possibility that a SLCM Popeye derivative may be a larger diameter.

If this is true, this is a major problem for any country which wishes to prevent or contain an Israeli nuclear strike in the region or elsewhere. While there is no actual proof that this missile exists or is nuclear-capable, any strategist contemplating dealing with Israel's nuclear arsenal is going to have to assume it exists, unless they can obtain accurate intelligence as to whether it exists and where the submarines possessing them are presently located.

Underwater detection of submarines outside of the usual sonar and things like magnetic anomaly detection (MAD) is a highly complicated and highly classified subject. Most experts dismiss satellite detection of submarines. This is called Non-Acoustic Anti-Submarine Warfare or NAASW. The US and Russia have both made efforts to employ lasers, infrared, and synthetic aperture radar (SAR) to detect submarines from satellites. This article covers some of the reported efforts.

So the question could become: is it possible to detect and track Israeli subs in the Mediterranean, Red Sea, Gulf of Oman, or Persian Gulf? The latter is quite shallow, which might make it possible, but then again Iran has submarines operating in the Persian Gulf, so an Israeli sub is unlikely to spend much time there. Nor would it need to, given the reported range of the Popeye missile. How detectable a fairly stealth sub would be in terms of wake detection in deeper waters is likely problematic.

This would reduce the issue to the standard method of using opposing attack sub sonar and other sensor arrays to detect and track the targeted sub. It's likely that both Russian and Chinese subs could be deployed against Israeli subs under the conditions of a general conflict with the threat of nuclear weapons deployment being the motivator.

Would Israel Use Nuclear Weapons

We shift the question to whether Israel would launch nuclear weapons - either tactical or strategic - against either Hezbollah or Iran or other entities in the region.

It would seem clear that if Israel were facing existential defeat that it would resort to nuclear weapons. The history of reported Israeli threats to employ nuclear weapons and the limited available evidence of alleged actual attempts to use them in previous conflicts - see Wikipedia's article on "The Samson Option" as well as Sy Hersh's book referenced above - lead inevitably to the conclusion that Israel would do so.

But the more immediate questions remain: Would Israel do so in a limited context? And what would be the specific circumstances under which Israel not only would do so but could do so? And what would be the consequences of its doing so?

The Pepe Escobar Incident

On April 20th, 2020, famed journalist Pepe Escobar revealed on X (Twitter) that he had been told by a high-level trusted intelligence source from a major nation (which he explicitly said was not Russia or China) that they had heard from another intelligence agency from another nation that Israel had launched an F-16 toward Iran with a nuclear device on board with the intention of executing an "electromagnetic pulse" (EMP) attack on Iran - and the Russians had shot it down somewhere as it was leaving Jordanian airspace.

No one believed him or his source. I did a couple Substack posts on that story which you can find here and here and here. I concluded that "something happened" and that the likely original source was China, but Pepe got it second-hand from another country.

I now believe that Pepe was correct when he said that this incident was a "message" to someone about something. I think it was a "back channel" message from Russia and/or China to Israel that if Israel even thought about using nukes in the current conflict that Russia and/or China would see that it ended badly for Israel - perhaps in nuclear terms. In other words, they told Israel to take the "Samson Option" - or any variant of that option - off the table or they would preempt the issue themselves.

How effective that message was or will be in the future is up for debate.

Israeli Strike On Iran

In The Center for Strategic and International Studies article "Study on a Possible Israeli Strike on Iran’s Nuclear Development Facilities" referenced above, they analyze the issues involved in that possibility. Among their conclusions was this:

A military strike by Israel against Iranian Nuclear Facilities is possible and the optimum route would be along the Syrian-Turkish border then over a small portion of Iraq then into Iran, and back the same route. However, the number of aircraft required, refueling along the way and getting to the targets without being detected or intercepted would be complex and high risk and would lack any assurances that the overall mission will have a high success rate.

Among other valuable information, they include a map of Iran's nuclear sites:

As you can see, there are a lot of sites related to Iran's nuclear program. This naturally complicates the problem for any Israeli or US attempt to destroy Iran's nuclear program, over and above the hardening of any particular site.

They also mentioned these circumstances which would likely force Israel to strike Iran:

Set of circumstances that could accelerate a strike on Iran‘s Nuclear Facilities:
• By 2010 Iran could pose a serious threat to it‘s neighbors and Israel. Enough of an inventory of Nuclear Weapons that can serve as a deterrent against U.S. and Israeli strikes.
• A modern SAM air defense system, such as the Russian S-300PMU2 ―Favorit‖, giving Iran an advanced Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) capability in addition to an advanced SAM Air Defense System.
• A maritime capability that can threaten commercial shipping and Naval Forces in the Gulf , and possibly interrupt the flow of oil through the Straits of Hormuz.
• Having in it‘s possession highly accurate short, medium and long range ballistic missiles, capable of carrying WMD
• Train and Control a number of Counter Insurgency groups to Increase the threat of asymmetric attacks against American interests and allies in the region and even beyond the region.

Note that four of those five capabilities are now in Iran's possession. Only the first one listed is not and probably never will be an Iranian capability.

The article goes on to select the three main targets of an Israeli strike, calculates the bomb types and numbers required to damage those targets and include pictures. They conclude that:

Total Force could be 25 F-15E for strike and 7 F-16I, with 38 F-16I for Air Escort/Fighter Sweep and Suppression of Enemy Air Defense (SEAD).
Bringing the total allocated strike force against Nuclear Targets in Iran to 70 aircraft.

They also have a nice map of Iran missile sites that would be targeted:

Their conclusions were:

Total Fuel in an F-15E for the Hi-Lo-Lo-Hi strike mission is 26,300 lbs, whereas that for an F-16I is about 14,755 lbs. The total maximum strike package was around 80 aircraft, all the 25 F-15I in the Israeli Airforce Inventory and 55 F-16I/C. The F-15E would then need 5 to 6 KC-130s to refuel from, and the F-16Is would require 6 to 7 KC-130.

Israel presently has 5 KC-130H and 4 B-700 (Source IISS). So all the Israeli Tankers will have to be airborne to service the F-15E and F-16I Strike Force during the outbound leg and inbound legs of the mission. Could be difficult to find a location along the route such that the tankers could avoid detection and possible interception.

These estimates were done assuming a 100% aircraft and weapons operational reliability and the strike force not encountering any Iranian Air and Ground Defense. So if we give the overall reliability to be 90% then we should add around 9 to 10 more aircraft, bringing the total strike force to 90.

So in essence over 20% of the high end combat aircraft of Israeli Airforce and 100% of the Tankers will have to be allocated for this mission.

We can conclude that a military strike by the Israeli Airforce against Iranian Nuclear Facilities is possible, however, it would be complex and high risk in the operational level and would lack any assurances of a high mission success rate.

They further discussed the possibility of using ballistic missiles instead of aircraft:

All of this can somewhat be avoided if Ballistic Missiles are used to carry out the mission. Israel has this capability and Iran does not have a Ballistic Missile Defense System such as the Russian S-300PMU2 ―Favorit‖ that was designed to
intercept ballistic missiles as well as combat aircraft. It has been reported that Iran has been negotiating with Russia for the procurement of the S-300PMU2 and they might get it now that the present US administration is taking the diplomatic dialogue approach with Iran.

Unfortunately for them, time has passed and Iran now has a domestically developed version of the Russian S-300 - the Bavar-373 and in addition the Russians have recently reportedly delivered not only the S-400 air defense system (how many is unknown) as well as the Murmansk electronic warfare system. Both of these will enormously complicate any Israeli - or US - air attack on Iran, probably inflicting serious damage on the attacking force unless previously overwhelmed by cruise missiles - which in itself is problematic since Russian ECW systems knocked down 75-90% of US Tomahawk cruise missiles fired against Syria during the Trump administration. That is exactly what things like the Murmansk system is designed to do.

They also assess the environmental effects of strikes on the Iranian nuclear facilities as follows:

Attacking the Bushehr Nuclear Reactor would release contamination in the form of radionuclides into the air.
• Most definitely Bahrain, Qatar and the UAE will be heavily affected by the radionuclides.
• Any strike on the Bushehr Nuclear Reactor will cause the immediate death of thousands of people living in or adjacent to the site, and thousands of subsequent cancer deaths or even up to hundreds of thousands depending on the population density along the contamination plume.

Yeah, that's going to go over well for Iran and the region...and Russia...and China...

They further discuss the possibility of an Iranian counter-attack with Shahab-3 ballistic missiles. They seem to assume that the US Patriot and the Israeli Iron Dome and related Israeli air defense systems would work fine. As we saw last April, this is not the case.

They do conclude, however, that the result would be major regional instability:

Give rise to regional instability and conflict as well as terrorism.
• Destabilizing Iraq through the Shia against US occupation, further arming insurgency groups when possible.
• Support and upgrade Taliban capabilities in Afghanistan.
• Increase the threat of asymmetric attacks against American interests and allies in
the region, especially against countries that host the US military such as Qatar and
Bahrain.
• Target U.S. and Western shipping in the Gulf, and possibly attempt to interrupt the flow of oil through the Gulf.

My question: What if the situation were already at a high pitch due to, say, a war in Lebanon escalating into war in Syria and Iraq? All of these negative consequences already exist and will only be exacerbated going forward. Israel and the US neocons might well decide that a nuclear or non-nuclear strike on Iran would be feasible given that they've already suffered all the negative consequences of such a strike - or at least think they have.

Interdiction or Preemption of Israel Nuclear Weapons

The Atomic Archive lists the following Israel nuclear sites:

Israel's Nuclear Facilities

Negev Nuclear Research Center, Dimona
Negev Nuclear Research Center. Plutonium production and extraction facilities, along with other weapons-related infrastructure.
31.001504°N, 35.146723°E

Eilabun is Israel's second weapons storage facility. Tactical nuclear shells and land mines are among its contents.
32.760226°N, 35.412077°E

Kfar Zekharya
Suspected nuclear missile base and bomb storage storage facility.
31.766267°N, 34.88142°

Nahal Soreq
Soreq is the equivalent of the U.S. national weapons laboratories. The lab handles weapons design and construction as well as research.
31.766267°N, 34.88142°E

Yodefat
Suspected nuclear weapons assembly facility.
32.85093°N, 35.27916°E

Tirosh
Reportedly one of two Israeli nuclear weapons storage facilities. It is speculated that that Tirosh is the strategic weapons storage site, while Eilabun is the tactical weapons storage site.
31.751963°N, 34.863524°E

Rafael
Rafael has been responsible for the actual assembly of Israeli nuclear weapons.
32.889534°N, 35.09119°E

Sources: Federation of American Scientists, Center for Non-Proliferation Studies, and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

My question: What happens if under the conditions of wider war Russia and/or China detect by close monitoring of those sites that Israel plans to conduct a nuclear strike, tactical or strategic, on one of the opposing parties, Hezbollah, Iran, Syria or Iraq? Will either of them intervene?

Russia, for one, has the satellite capability, the signals intelligence capability in near-by Syria and Mediterranean fleet, and probably the ground intelligence assets inside Israel to make such a detection possible.

China has a large signals intelligence gathering capability at its naval base in Djibouti and as I reported in my articles on Pepe Escobar's report about the Israeli nuke is a likely source of the intelligence on what actually happened (if anything). IIRC that base hosted a Chinese destroyer, a Chinese submarine and a logistics ship at one point or another.

So what happens if Russia decides to preempt Israel's nuclear strike by taking out the relevant Israeli military assets using either a hypersonic or ballistic missile with either a conventional or worse, nuclear, warhead? What does Israel do then? What does the US do then?

Or what happens if either Israel or the US makes an existential attack on Syria? Does anyone doubt that the US wants Russia out of Syria and the Assad regime overthrown? If Russia decides to defend Syria from being taken off the board, how does Israel or the US react to that? Russian forces inside Syria are deficient compared to US forces in the region - except for the Russian Mediterranean Fleet and the ability of Russia to fire hypersonic missiles with greater than 1,000-mile range from its fighter-bomber aircraft, long-range bombers, and missile ships in the Black and Caspian seas. Russia could put up a serious fight. But if that fight is against Israel, does the US stand by? If the fight is against the US, how does that conflict be contained and not spiral up to a full nuclear exchange, especially in light of the apparent US decision to allow NATO to directly support Ukraine in firing long-range missiles deep inside Russian territory?

What happens if Israel makes or attempts to make a nuclear attack on Iran or the US makes an all-out effort to destroy Iran's infrastructure, economy and military capability? Does Russia stand back and allow its explicit ally, Iran, to be destroyed? Does China, with a huge financial investment in Iran and a desperate need for Iranian oil, stand back and allow Iran's government to be destroyed and its oil reserves controlled by the US on the brink of a US-China conflict?

Conclusion

I think everyone can see the problem. The outcomes of all these scenarios depend on whether the parties, ideologically driven as the US neocons and the Israelis are, or driven by the need to end US/Israeli domination of the Middle East as their opponents are, have the motivation or capability to contain the inevitable escalation.

Negotiations? Who can negotiate an existential crisis? In these circumstances, anyone who shows weakness will not have his throat merely nuzzled with no teeth, as some animals do when they fight. They will have their throats ripped out. The Zionist project can't afford to fail against Hezbollah or their whole myth comes crashing down at the very least and a real likelihood of expulsion from the region. The Palestinians can't afford to fail or they will be driven into exile. The US neocons never back down; they "have no reverse gear", as Alexander Mercouris puts it. The Iranians won't back down and short of killing thirty million people in Tehran can't be made to back down with a population of 70-80 million, religiously motivated. The Russians and Chinese can't allow a major regional ally, Iran, to be destroyed or serious strategic economic consequences will ensue.

There is no negotiated settlement on the horizon. It's either win or die.

You should all know by now that I don't have a high opinion of the human race. What we're going to get from this situation is what humans always get from their mistakes: consequences.

For me, as soon as the US and Russia start shooting at each other seriously, I'm heading for northern Utah. According to the fallout maps, that's the only place in the continental United States that won't be covered in radioactive fallout.

For the rest of you, YMMV.